PMC:7386785 / 125010-127687 JSONTXT

{"project":"LitCovid-PD-MONDO","denotations":[{"id":"T512","span":{"begin":366,"end":369},"obj":"Disease"},{"id":"T513","span":{"begin":711,"end":719},"obj":"Disease"},{"id":"T514","span":{"begin":846,"end":850},"obj":"Disease"},{"id":"T515","span":{"begin":857,"end":866},"obj":"Disease"},{"id":"T516","span":{"begin":867,"end":869},"obj":"Disease"}],"attributes":[{"id":"A512","pred":"mondo_id","subj":"T512","obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/MONDO_0009771"},{"id":"A513","pred":"mondo_id","subj":"T513","obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/MONDO_0100096"},{"id":"A514","pred":"mondo_id","subj":"T514","obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/MONDO_0005091"},{"id":"A515","pred":"mondo_id","subj":"T515","obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/MONDO_0005550"},{"id":"A516","pred":"mondo_id","subj":"T516","obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/MONDO_0010725"}],"text":"Study characteristics\nPatient Sampling Purpose: to analyse OTDs as a diagnostic criterion for COVID‐19Design: cross‐sectional, prospective single‐centre studyRecruitment: all suspected cases presenting to the EDSample size: n = 870 (cases = 154)Inclusion criteria:presence of respiratory symptoms and suspicious epidemiological links or travel history or\nnew onset OTD\nExclusion criteria: not specified\nPatient characteristics and setting Facility cases: positive RT‐PCR for 2019‐nCovFacility controls: negative RT‐PCR for 2019‐nCovCountry: SingaporeDates: 26 March 2020‐10 April 2020Symptoms and severity: loss of sense of smell/tasteDemographics: not specifiedExposure history: close contact of a confirmed COVID‐19 case: cases 42/112, controls 37/679\nIndex tests Loss of sense of smell/taste\nTarget condition and reference standard(s) TC: SARS‐Cov‐2 infection\nRS: RT‐PCR (oropharyngeal swabs)\nFlow and timing Time interval: same day\nComparative  \nNotes  \nMethodological quality\nItem Authors' judgement Risk of bias Applicability concerns\nDOMAIN 1: Patient Selection\nWas a consecutive or random sample of patients enrolled? Unclear    \nWas a case‐control design avoided? Yes    \nDid the study avoid inappropriate exclusions? Unclear    \nDid the study avoid inappropriate inclusions? Yes    \nCould the selection of patients have introduced bias?   Low risk  \nAre there concerns that the included patients and setting do not match the review question?     Low concern\nDOMAIN 2: Index Test (All tests)\nWere the index test results interpreted without knowledge of the results of the reference standard? Yes    \nIf a threshold was used, was it pre‐specified? No    \nCould the conduct or interpretation of the index test have introduced bias?   High risk  \nAre there concerns that the index test, its conduct, or interpretation differ from the review question?     Low concern\nDOMAIN 3: Reference Standard\nIs the reference standards likely to correctly classify the target condition? Yes    \nWere the reference standard results interpreted without knowledge of the results of the index tests? Unclear    \nCould the reference standard, its conduct, or its interpretation have introduced bias?   Low risk  \nAre there concerns that the target condition as defined by the reference standard does not match the question?     Low concern\nDOMAIN 4: Flow and Timing\nWas there an appropriate interval between index test and reference standard? Yes    \nDid all patients receive the same reference standard? Yes    \nWere all patients included in the analysis? Yes    \nCould the patient flow have introduced bias?   Low risk  "}

{"project":"LitCovid-PD-CLO","denotations":[{"id":"T173","span":{"begin":68,"end":69},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001020"},{"id":"T174","span":{"begin":699,"end":700},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001020"},{"id":"T175","span":{"begin":762,"end":767},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/UBERON_0000473"},{"id":"T176","span":{"begin":867,"end":869},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0008882"},{"id":"T177","span":{"begin":1086,"end":1087},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001020"},{"id":"T178","span":{"begin":1158,"end":1159},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001020"},{"id":"T179","span":{"begin":1515,"end":1519},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/UBERON_0000473"},{"id":"T180","span":{"begin":1525,"end":1530},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/UBERON_0000473"},{"id":"T181","span":{"begin":1547,"end":1551},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/UBERON_0000473"},{"id":"T182","span":{"begin":1646,"end":1647},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001020"},{"id":"T183","span":{"begin":1749,"end":1753},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/UBERON_0000473"},{"id":"T184","span":{"begin":1827,"end":1831},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/UBERON_0000473"},{"id":"T185","span":{"begin":2128,"end":2133},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/UBERON_0000473"},{"id":"T186","span":{"begin":2457,"end":2461},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/UBERON_0000473"}],"text":"Study characteristics\nPatient Sampling Purpose: to analyse OTDs as a diagnostic criterion for COVID‐19Design: cross‐sectional, prospective single‐centre studyRecruitment: all suspected cases presenting to the EDSample size: n = 870 (cases = 154)Inclusion criteria:presence of respiratory symptoms and suspicious epidemiological links or travel history or\nnew onset OTD\nExclusion criteria: not specified\nPatient characteristics and setting Facility cases: positive RT‐PCR for 2019‐nCovFacility controls: negative RT‐PCR for 2019‐nCovCountry: SingaporeDates: 26 March 2020‐10 April 2020Symptoms and severity: loss of sense of smell/tasteDemographics: not specifiedExposure history: close contact of a confirmed COVID‐19 case: cases 42/112, controls 37/679\nIndex tests Loss of sense of smell/taste\nTarget condition and reference standard(s) TC: SARS‐Cov‐2 infection\nRS: RT‐PCR (oropharyngeal swabs)\nFlow and timing Time interval: same day\nComparative  \nNotes  \nMethodological quality\nItem Authors' judgement Risk of bias Applicability concerns\nDOMAIN 1: Patient Selection\nWas a consecutive or random sample of patients enrolled? Unclear    \nWas a case‐control design avoided? Yes    \nDid the study avoid inappropriate exclusions? Unclear    \nDid the study avoid inappropriate inclusions? Yes    \nCould the selection of patients have introduced bias?   Low risk  \nAre there concerns that the included patients and setting do not match the review question?     Low concern\nDOMAIN 2: Index Test (All tests)\nWere the index test results interpreted without knowledge of the results of the reference standard? Yes    \nIf a threshold was used, was it pre‐specified? No    \nCould the conduct or interpretation of the index test have introduced bias?   High risk  \nAre there concerns that the index test, its conduct, or interpretation differ from the review question?     Low concern\nDOMAIN 3: Reference Standard\nIs the reference standards likely to correctly classify the target condition? Yes    \nWere the reference standard results interpreted without knowledge of the results of the index tests? Unclear    \nCould the reference standard, its conduct, or its interpretation have introduced bias?   Low risk  \nAre there concerns that the target condition as defined by the reference standard does not match the question?     Low concern\nDOMAIN 4: Flow and Timing\nWas there an appropriate interval between index test and reference standard? Yes    \nDid all patients receive the same reference standard? Yes    \nWere all patients included in the analysis? Yes    \nCould the patient flow have introduced bias?   Low risk  "}

{"project":"LitCovid-PD-CHEBI","denotations":[{"id":"T2856","span":{"begin":867,"end":869},"obj":"Chemical"}],"attributes":[{"id":"A9269","pred":"chebi_id","subj":"T2856","obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CHEBI_73819"}],"text":"Study characteristics\nPatient Sampling Purpose: to analyse OTDs as a diagnostic criterion for COVID‐19Design: cross‐sectional, prospective single‐centre studyRecruitment: all suspected cases presenting to the EDSample size: n = 870 (cases = 154)Inclusion criteria:presence of respiratory symptoms and suspicious epidemiological links or travel history or\nnew onset OTD\nExclusion criteria: not specified\nPatient characteristics and setting Facility cases: positive RT‐PCR for 2019‐nCovFacility controls: negative RT‐PCR for 2019‐nCovCountry: SingaporeDates: 26 March 2020‐10 April 2020Symptoms and severity: loss of sense of smell/tasteDemographics: not specifiedExposure history: close contact of a confirmed COVID‐19 case: cases 42/112, controls 37/679\nIndex tests Loss of sense of smell/taste\nTarget condition and reference standard(s) TC: SARS‐Cov‐2 infection\nRS: RT‐PCR (oropharyngeal swabs)\nFlow and timing Time interval: same day\nComparative  \nNotes  \nMethodological quality\nItem Authors' judgement Risk of bias Applicability concerns\nDOMAIN 1: Patient Selection\nWas a consecutive or random sample of patients enrolled? Unclear    \nWas a case‐control design avoided? Yes    \nDid the study avoid inappropriate exclusions? Unclear    \nDid the study avoid inappropriate inclusions? Yes    \nCould the selection of patients have introduced bias?   Low risk  \nAre there concerns that the included patients and setting do not match the review question?     Low concern\nDOMAIN 2: Index Test (All tests)\nWere the index test results interpreted without knowledge of the results of the reference standard? Yes    \nIf a threshold was used, was it pre‐specified? No    \nCould the conduct or interpretation of the index test have introduced bias?   High risk  \nAre there concerns that the index test, its conduct, or interpretation differ from the review question?     Low concern\nDOMAIN 3: Reference Standard\nIs the reference standards likely to correctly classify the target condition? Yes    \nWere the reference standard results interpreted without knowledge of the results of the index tests? Unclear    \nCould the reference standard, its conduct, or its interpretation have introduced bias?   Low risk  \nAre there concerns that the target condition as defined by the reference standard does not match the question?     Low concern\nDOMAIN 4: Flow and Timing\nWas there an appropriate interval between index test and reference standard? Yes    \nDid all patients receive the same reference standard? Yes    \nWere all patients included in the analysis? Yes    \nCould the patient flow have introduced bias?   Low risk  "}

{"project":"LitCovid-PD-GO-BP","denotations":[{"id":"T1","span":{"begin":617,"end":631},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/GO_0007608"},{"id":"T2","span":{"begin":777,"end":791},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/GO_0007608"},{"id":"T3","span":{"begin":792,"end":797},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/GO_0050909"}],"text":"Study characteristics\nPatient Sampling Purpose: to analyse OTDs as a diagnostic criterion for COVID‐19Design: cross‐sectional, prospective single‐centre studyRecruitment: all suspected cases presenting to the EDSample size: n = 870 (cases = 154)Inclusion criteria:presence of respiratory symptoms and suspicious epidemiological links or travel history or\nnew onset OTD\nExclusion criteria: not specified\nPatient characteristics and setting Facility cases: positive RT‐PCR for 2019‐nCovFacility controls: negative RT‐PCR for 2019‐nCovCountry: SingaporeDates: 26 March 2020‐10 April 2020Symptoms and severity: loss of sense of smell/tasteDemographics: not specifiedExposure history: close contact of a confirmed COVID‐19 case: cases 42/112, controls 37/679\nIndex tests Loss of sense of smell/taste\nTarget condition and reference standard(s) TC: SARS‐Cov‐2 infection\nRS: RT‐PCR (oropharyngeal swabs)\nFlow and timing Time interval: same day\nComparative  \nNotes  \nMethodological quality\nItem Authors' judgement Risk of bias Applicability concerns\nDOMAIN 1: Patient Selection\nWas a consecutive or random sample of patients enrolled? Unclear    \nWas a case‐control design avoided? Yes    \nDid the study avoid inappropriate exclusions? Unclear    \nDid the study avoid inappropriate inclusions? Yes    \nCould the selection of patients have introduced bias?   Low risk  \nAre there concerns that the included patients and setting do not match the review question?     Low concern\nDOMAIN 2: Index Test (All tests)\nWere the index test results interpreted without knowledge of the results of the reference standard? Yes    \nIf a threshold was used, was it pre‐specified? No    \nCould the conduct or interpretation of the index test have introduced bias?   High risk  \nAre there concerns that the index test, its conduct, or interpretation differ from the review question?     Low concern\nDOMAIN 3: Reference Standard\nIs the reference standards likely to correctly classify the target condition? Yes    \nWere the reference standard results interpreted without knowledge of the results of the index tests? Unclear    \nCould the reference standard, its conduct, or its interpretation have introduced bias?   Low risk  \nAre there concerns that the target condition as defined by the reference standard does not match the question?     Low concern\nDOMAIN 4: Flow and Timing\nWas there an appropriate interval between index test and reference standard? Yes    \nDid all patients receive the same reference standard? Yes    \nWere all patients included in the analysis? Yes    \nCould the patient flow have introduced bias?   Low risk  "}

{"project":"LitCovid-sentences","denotations":[{"id":"T1576","span":{"begin":0,"end":21},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1577","span":{"begin":22,"end":355},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1578","span":{"begin":356,"end":369},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1579","span":{"begin":370,"end":403},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1580","span":{"begin":404,"end":542},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1581","span":{"begin":543,"end":558},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1582","span":{"begin":559,"end":755},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1583","span":{"begin":756,"end":797},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1584","span":{"begin":798,"end":866},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1585","span":{"begin":867,"end":899},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1586","span":{"begin":900,"end":940},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1587","span":{"begin":941,"end":955},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1588","span":{"begin":956,"end":964},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1589","span":{"begin":965,"end":987},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1590","span":{"begin":988,"end":1053},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1591","span":{"begin":1054,"end":1063},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1592","span":{"begin":1064,"end":1081},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1593","span":{"begin":1082,"end":1138},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1594","span":{"begin":1140,"end":1153},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1595","span":{"begin":1154,"end":1188},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1596","span":{"begin":1190,"end":1199},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1597","span":{"begin":1200,"end":1245},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1598","span":{"begin":1247,"end":1260},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1599","span":{"begin":1261,"end":1306},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1600","span":{"begin":1308,"end":1317},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1601","span":{"begin":1318,"end":1387},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1602","span":{"begin":1388,"end":1498},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1603","span":{"begin":1499,"end":1508},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1604","span":{"begin":1509,"end":1531},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1605","span":{"begin":1532,"end":1631},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1606","span":{"begin":1633,"end":1642},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1607","span":{"begin":1643,"end":1689},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1608","span":{"begin":1691,"end":1699},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1609","span":{"begin":1700,"end":1792},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1610","span":{"begin":1793,"end":1915},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1611","span":{"begin":1916,"end":1925},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1612","span":{"begin":1926,"end":1944},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1613","span":{"begin":1945,"end":2022},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1614","span":{"begin":2024,"end":2033},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1615","span":{"begin":2034,"end":2134},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1616","span":{"begin":2136,"end":2149},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1617","span":{"begin":2150,"end":2252},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1618","span":{"begin":2253,"end":2382},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1619","span":{"begin":2383,"end":2392},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1620","span":{"begin":2393,"end":2408},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1621","span":{"begin":2409,"end":2485},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1622","span":{"begin":2487,"end":2496},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1623","span":{"begin":2497,"end":2550},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1624","span":{"begin":2552,"end":2561},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1625","span":{"begin":2562,"end":2605},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1626","span":{"begin":2607,"end":2616},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1627","span":{"begin":2617,"end":2677},"obj":"Sentence"}],"namespaces":[{"prefix":"_base","uri":"http://pubannotation.org/ontology/tao.owl#"}],"text":"Study characteristics\nPatient Sampling Purpose: to analyse OTDs as a diagnostic criterion for COVID‐19Design: cross‐sectional, prospective single‐centre studyRecruitment: all suspected cases presenting to the EDSample size: n = 870 (cases = 154)Inclusion criteria:presence of respiratory symptoms and suspicious epidemiological links or travel history or\nnew onset OTD\nExclusion criteria: not specified\nPatient characteristics and setting Facility cases: positive RT‐PCR for 2019‐nCovFacility controls: negative RT‐PCR for 2019‐nCovCountry: SingaporeDates: 26 March 2020‐10 April 2020Symptoms and severity: loss of sense of smell/tasteDemographics: not specifiedExposure history: close contact of a confirmed COVID‐19 case: cases 42/112, controls 37/679\nIndex tests Loss of sense of smell/taste\nTarget condition and reference standard(s) TC: SARS‐Cov‐2 infection\nRS: RT‐PCR (oropharyngeal swabs)\nFlow and timing Time interval: same day\nComparative  \nNotes  \nMethodological quality\nItem Authors' judgement Risk of bias Applicability concerns\nDOMAIN 1: Patient Selection\nWas a consecutive or random sample of patients enrolled? Unclear    \nWas a case‐control design avoided? Yes    \nDid the study avoid inappropriate exclusions? Unclear    \nDid the study avoid inappropriate inclusions? Yes    \nCould the selection of patients have introduced bias?   Low risk  \nAre there concerns that the included patients and setting do not match the review question?     Low concern\nDOMAIN 2: Index Test (All tests)\nWere the index test results interpreted without knowledge of the results of the reference standard? Yes    \nIf a threshold was used, was it pre‐specified? No    \nCould the conduct or interpretation of the index test have introduced bias?   High risk  \nAre there concerns that the index test, its conduct, or interpretation differ from the review question?     Low concern\nDOMAIN 3: Reference Standard\nIs the reference standards likely to correctly classify the target condition? Yes    \nWere the reference standard results interpreted without knowledge of the results of the index tests? Unclear    \nCould the reference standard, its conduct, or its interpretation have introduced bias?   Low risk  \nAre there concerns that the target condition as defined by the reference standard does not match the question?     Low concern\nDOMAIN 4: Flow and Timing\nWas there an appropriate interval between index test and reference standard? Yes    \nDid all patients receive the same reference standard? Yes    \nWere all patients included in the analysis? Yes    \nCould the patient flow have introduced bias?   Low risk  "}

{"project":"LitCovid-PubTator","denotations":[{"id":"2181","span":{"begin":22,"end":29},"obj":"Species"},{"id":"2182","span":{"begin":390,"end":403},"obj":"Species"},{"id":"2183","span":{"begin":404,"end":411},"obj":"Species"},{"id":"2184","span":{"begin":846,"end":856},"obj":"Species"},{"id":"2185","span":{"begin":1064,"end":1071},"obj":"Species"},{"id":"2186","span":{"begin":1120,"end":1128},"obj":"Species"},{"id":"2187","span":{"begin":1341,"end":1349},"obj":"Species"},{"id":"2188","span":{"begin":1425,"end":1433},"obj":"Species"},{"id":"2189","span":{"begin":2505,"end":2513},"obj":"Species"},{"id":"2190","span":{"begin":2571,"end":2579},"obj":"Species"},{"id":"2191","span":{"begin":2627,"end":2634},"obj":"Species"},{"id":"2192","span":{"begin":60,"end":64},"obj":"Disease"},{"id":"2193","span":{"begin":95,"end":100},"obj":"Disease"},{"id":"2194","span":{"begin":277,"end":297},"obj":"Disease"},{"id":"2195","span":{"begin":711,"end":719},"obj":"Disease"}],"attributes":[{"id":"A2181","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"2181","obj":"Tax:9606"},{"id":"A2182","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"2182","obj":"Tax:32644"},{"id":"A2183","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"2183","obj":"Tax:9606"},{"id":"A2184","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"2184","obj":"Tax:2697049"},{"id":"A2185","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"2185","obj":"Tax:9606"},{"id":"A2186","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"2186","obj":"Tax:9606"},{"id":"A2187","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"2187","obj":"Tax:9606"},{"id":"A2188","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"2188","obj":"Tax:9606"},{"id":"A2189","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"2189","obj":"Tax:9606"},{"id":"A2190","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"2190","obj":"Tax:9606"},{"id":"A2191","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"2191","obj":"Tax:9606"},{"id":"A2193","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"2193","obj":"MESH:C000657245"},{"id":"A2194","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"2194","obj":"MESH:D012818"},{"id":"A2195","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"2195","obj":"MESH:C000657245"}],"namespaces":[{"prefix":"Tax","uri":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/taxonomy/"},{"prefix":"MESH","uri":"https://id.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/"},{"prefix":"Gene","uri":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/gene/"},{"prefix":"CVCL","uri":"https://web.expasy.org/cellosaurus/CVCL_"}],"text":"Study characteristics\nPatient Sampling Purpose: to analyse OTDs as a diagnostic criterion for COVID‐19Design: cross‐sectional, prospective single‐centre studyRecruitment: all suspected cases presenting to the EDSample size: n = 870 (cases = 154)Inclusion criteria:presence of respiratory symptoms and suspicious epidemiological links or travel history or\nnew onset OTD\nExclusion criteria: not specified\nPatient characteristics and setting Facility cases: positive RT‐PCR for 2019‐nCovFacility controls: negative RT‐PCR for 2019‐nCovCountry: SingaporeDates: 26 March 2020‐10 April 2020Symptoms and severity: loss of sense of smell/tasteDemographics: not specifiedExposure history: close contact of a confirmed COVID‐19 case: cases 42/112, controls 37/679\nIndex tests Loss of sense of smell/taste\nTarget condition and reference standard(s) TC: SARS‐Cov‐2 infection\nRS: RT‐PCR (oropharyngeal swabs)\nFlow and timing Time interval: same day\nComparative  \nNotes  \nMethodological quality\nItem Authors' judgement Risk of bias Applicability concerns\nDOMAIN 1: Patient Selection\nWas a consecutive or random sample of patients enrolled? Unclear    \nWas a case‐control design avoided? Yes    \nDid the study avoid inappropriate exclusions? Unclear    \nDid the study avoid inappropriate inclusions? Yes    \nCould the selection of patients have introduced bias?   Low risk  \nAre there concerns that the included patients and setting do not match the review question?     Low concern\nDOMAIN 2: Index Test (All tests)\nWere the index test results interpreted without knowledge of the results of the reference standard? Yes    \nIf a threshold was used, was it pre‐specified? No    \nCould the conduct or interpretation of the index test have introduced bias?   High risk  \nAre there concerns that the index test, its conduct, or interpretation differ from the review question?     Low concern\nDOMAIN 3: Reference Standard\nIs the reference standards likely to correctly classify the target condition? Yes    \nWere the reference standard results interpreted without knowledge of the results of the index tests? Unclear    \nCould the reference standard, its conduct, or its interpretation have introduced bias?   Low risk  \nAre there concerns that the target condition as defined by the reference standard does not match the question?     Low concern\nDOMAIN 4: Flow and Timing\nWas there an appropriate interval between index test and reference standard? Yes    \nDid all patients receive the same reference standard? Yes    \nWere all patients included in the analysis? Yes    \nCould the patient flow have introduced bias?   Low risk  "}